Anastasia Pechenyuk23:46, 19.10.23
Support for Ukraine and Israel is a matter of US national security, the American president will convince.
In the near future, US President Joe Biden plans to address the American people with a direct call to continue funding military aid to Ukraine and Israel, CNN reports citing two officials of the presidential administration.
Officials say that after Biden saw horrific scenes of violence in Israel, which is at war with the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, he expressed to his top advisers a desire to speak directly to the American people about the importance of supporting allies forced to respond to attacks on their soil.
In his speech, Biden is expected to argue that supporting Ukraine and Israel is a matter of US national security.
“He is going to prove that the price of inaction and the price of withdrawal [from aid to Ukraine and Israel] is much higher,” the official said.
Sources say Biden has been working on the speech with his top aides for a week. In particular, on the way to the USA after a visit to Israel.
Advisers expect that, as with any major speech, the president himself will put the finishing touches and edit his prepared remarks in the hours before the speech.
(C)UNIAN 2023
So it took an attack on Israel before the old fool finally woke up.
You have to give him credit though, I’d bet 90% of his cabinet and administration support Hamas. I know a couple have resigned too.
I strongly doubt anyone in his cabinet or administration support Hamas. Can you name anyone?
“resigned” – The only one I know of is Josh Paul, who resigned from the public affairs office at the State Department’s Bureau of Political-Military Affairs. And he didn’t resign because he supports Hamas. He resigned because he objects to the US supplying arms that might be used to attack innocent Palestinians.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/state-department-official-explains-why-he-resigned-over-u-s-response-to-israel-hamas-war
Realiy? You are happy to make completely unsubstantiated claims, yet when I provide factual information that can be confirmed by simple research, you balk at it simply because you don’t like it. And you accuse me of partisanship? I criticize ALL enemies of Ukraine. Especially the ones who are enabling genocide.
Re your many insults and libelous allegations: I have already proved them wrong in multiple previous replies to you. Same with the allegations in your “Steve” post. As even a rudimentary analysis of UT content confirms.
See the reply I posted to “Steve.” What specific facts in that reply do you dispute?
You have yet to name even one pro-Ukraine politician, media figure or entity that I have criticized. That is because there isn’t one. Indeed I have consistently heaped lavish praise on people; many or most of whom being high profile Republicans, that support Ukraine.
You refuse to confirm whether you agree or not with the following statement:
If you vote for an end to, a cutback, or a delay in Ukraine aid, or you lobby for those things, you are an agent of Russia. Whether defacto or actual is immaterial.
Agree yes or no?
Please state even one fact that I have given about that faction that is incorrect?
I am a member of the UK Conservative Party, which has no putler wing.
The opposition crypto-Marxist Labour Party does have one and it will cause trouble if elected next year. But it won’t be as bad or dangerous as the current putler wing of the Republican Party.
I would prefer to continue on this site until the end of the war. As the owner, you can ban me if your hatred becomes overpowering and there is nothing I can do about that.
In any case, I may well independently decide to continue as a passive reader only.
You can ask the readers if you like. I will instantly stop posting articles and making comments if they don’t want me here.
I am banned from commenting on the Telegraph because I posted harsh replies to putinoid scum commenters. But I remain a paid account holder. That is why you see many superb articles from behind the paywall of that fine paper here.
One final point : I never discuss my personal life online, but I live this war 24/7 and have not had even one uninterrupted night’s sleep since last year, as I have to frequently check the status of family members and friends who are active participants when they briefly are able to go online.
Can’t you just keep your hatred to yourself for a while? I am fed up with it. You don’t know me, I don’t know you and we will never meet. I’ve never done anything to you and never said anything bad about you. Ukraine is in mortal danger, yet you keep attacking me? I don’t get it.
This is the reply in full to your “Steve” piece:
A lot of articles appear on UT from Newsweek. It is right of center:-
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/newsweek/
A lot of articles are posted on UT from The Daily Telegraph, one of the oldest Conservative papers in the world and the biggest Conservative site that supports Ukraine in the world. Unless anyone knows another one?
Some articles appear here from WSJ; one of the very few, possibly the only US conservative site that supports Ukraine.
A lot of articles appear here; probably in excess of 50%, from Ukrainians themselves; either from Ukrainian sites like the KP, KI, Unian, NV, Ukrinform, Obozrevatel, EP etc, or from Ukrainians on LinkedIn. Most have no US party political content whatsoever.
Conclusion: Steve either does not read UT, skims it, or has some other agenda.
I can’t speak for the silent readers, but the overwhelming majority of commenters on UT are right of centre. Some are far right. There is maybe one Democrat loyalist and he is strongly pro-Ukraine.
It is the ruling Democrats who are helping Ukraine and they; particularly the president, get frequent fierce criticism from commenters for giving Ukraine just enough to stay in the game; never enough to win. Biden actually gets more criticism than Trump. When Trump or one of his followers makes some hideous statement about cancelling Ukraine funding or some ridiculous “land for peace” offer, he/they rightly get criticised. The parliament of Ukraine is clear that no negotiations involving the gifting of land to the aggressor will happen. In fact they want to enshrine that in law.
So, if you propose land for peace, you are not remotely pro-Ukraine. Simple as that. If a Senator or Representative votes for an end to, a cutback, or a delay in Ukraine aid, or lobbies for those things, he/she a Russian agent. Whether actual or defacto is immaterial.
The Conservative wing of the GOP has decent people who support Ukraine like Roger Wicker, Nikki Haley, Lindsay Graham etc. The Putin wing wants to end all aid and unhappily is succeeding at the moment.
Please explain what factual information you believe to be untrue?
“I’d bet” is an opinion, Scradge. Besides that, his press sec’y has already “clarified” statements made by the admin in support of Palestinians and Iranians. Josh Paul quit.
Not so funny this happens right after Biden releases $6 billion for Iran, which they’re trying to do a mea culpa on now.
Unsubstantiated? You mean like your constant accusation that Trump is a russian agent despite all the facts, testimony, investigations and evident? And despite all his actions to hurt russia like shutting down Nord Stream 2, closing US embassies, sending KGB agents home, sending weapons and ships, extending sanctions, new sanctions, producing tons of oil and gas which dropped the prices to unsustainable levels which hurt russia? Yeah he’s said some pretty ignorant things but his actions speak another tune. I would think someone endowed with some logic like you could see that but I’ve been wrong before, lol…
🙄 for real, he couldn’t have made the case for Ukraine BEFORE the bullshit in the middle east.
Very good.
But, this should have happened a long time ago already and at least a couple of times. This is a very important subject, a continuing crisis, and, although worth it, is costing us lots of money.
During his argument about why it’s so important to support Ukraine, he can use the opportunity to give concrete reasons why he did it so haphazardly, slowly, and sent aid in insufficient numbers.